


Oh Childe of Mine

by Peasant



Series: Essays [12]
Category: Jossverse
Genre: Essays, Other
Language: English
Status: Completed
Published: 2003-09-07
Updated: 2003-09-07
Packaged: 2018-01-14 23:04:07
Rating: General Audiences
Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply
Chapters: 1
Words: 1,045
Publisher: archiveofourown.org
Story URL: https://archiveofourown.org/works/1282033
Author URL: https://archiveofourown.org/users/Peasant/pseuds/Peasant
Summary: <blockquote class="userstuff">
              <p>An essay about using the term ‘childe’ and its alternatives, and what they mean in storytelling terms.</p>
            </blockquote>





	Oh Childe of Mine

When it comes to the childe debate there are two separate arguments against the word’s use. The first is entirely semantic – that childe isn’t canon but imported from other vampire stories and is thus inappropriate for the Jossyverse. Now as I have said before, one can argue until one is blue in the face about whether or not the word is canon, and I have always felt that a case can be made that it is, but the fact remains that a writer needs some word. Given which one might as well use childe simply because people are so used to it that it will go unremarked. BTVS fanfic has now been going for sufficiently long a time that it has a well-established fanon, and if you try to start some new usage that is in contradiction to the established one it is going to stick out like a sore thumb – and thus be liable to irritate far more than childe ever does. When it comes down to it why should it actually matter if the word arose in other vamp mythologies? The whole idea of vampires is hardly copyright to Joss Whedon and I can see absolutely no harm in a little further cross-pollination. I thus do tend to dismiss the purely semantic arguments

The remaining arguments though have to my mind more validity, because as both Netweight and Rahirah pointed out, a frequent objection to using childe is the squickiness of implying familial relations amongst the vampires at the same time as they are having sexual relations. Actually I think this is the core of ninety percent of the objections, because it is noticeable that most people who raise semantic arguments against childe get nothing like so worked up about fledgling (non canon) or grandsire (contradicts canon).

Now I always respect somebody’s right to be squicked. I know I have things that I can’t stand the very idea of – mother/son incest being one of the worst, hence my having absolutely no truck with the notion that Dru was Spike’s sire – so I thoroughly understand if other people have their own personal peeves and want nothing to do with a subject. I have no doubt that a lot of the people who can’t stand the notion of Angelus as Spike’s sire trace it back to being revolted by the thought of the two of them being involved sexually. And unlike many slashers I have no problem with that – if you are squicked by something you are squicked, I’m not going to heap abuse on you for the fact. So if you object to childe because of the relationship it implies then I won’t argue with you.

However… (there is always a however) I must say that the implication of an abusive paternal relationship is actually the main reason why I use the word. Because it is precisely the ‘family’ possibilities of vampire culture that interest me. That delightful mix of power, rebellion, submission and dependency, and whether what results is love or just the only thing left in a hellish situation, is precisely what I want to write about. This may or may not make me a warped individual, but I do postulate that given the situation I am trying to portray childe is the best choice of word.

Having a fledge referred to as their sire’s get or spawn (the only two sensible alternatives to childe that I have seen suggested) immediately transforms the relationship into one of demon to demon. Now that is fine and dandy if what you want to write is either set well in the present with Spike nicely shucking off his demon features to be redeemed by his love for Buffy, and it is also fine and dandy of you want to write as close to the edge of acceptable as you can stomach and really explore what demons are supposed to be like in the Jossyverse. The trouble for me with the former is that it isn’t the time period I want to write about and with the later that my stomach isn’t strong enough. Now bear in mind that I am the one who had the thing with the dog, and the tooth, and the 23 geese, but there is still a limit to what I want to do. I push myself sometimes, I like to occasionally remind my readers (and myself) that these are vampires and they kill, torture and rape for pleasure. But there are limits. If one goes too far down that path it becomes a catalogue of disgust along the lines of American Serial Killer and I cannot see any justification for that. It becomes futile, a game of ‘who can come up with the worst tortures’ which I so don’t want to get into.

Hence for me the familial aspects of the Fanged Four are not just fun but essential – the light that is needed to contrast with the dark. The part that allows us to connect on some level with what these characters are and thus enable us to care about what happens to them. Because to be frank, if Angelus was only as he is portrayed on the show – cruel, manipulative, without any sense of affection at all – then I would find it not just hard to write him but impossible. For me there has to be some sense of connection, just the suspicion that in the mix of possessiveness, and pride in his own power to corrupt and control his fledglings, somewhere in the turbulent back of his being, is something that we can understand as love.

The relationship between a vampire and his get is raw, demonic, nothing that I can equate with. They make good villains but poor protagonists. The relationship between a sire and his childe, however warped, however sad, has a kernel of humanity that makes it worth writing about.

* * *

This essay was posted because **Netweight** posted her [thoughts on the use of the word  childe](http://www.livejournal.com/users/netweight/4779.html), as did **Rahirah** [a while ago](http://www.livejournal.com/users/rahirah/19603.html), and since my thoughts in response have become involved and lengthy (I can see you all looking shocked that I should ever be long-winded, but it seems to be the case ;-) I am posting here rather than replying in their journals.


End file.
